Between IRAQ and a hard place - Quiz

[wadestock]

After seeing the McLaughlin Group this past sunday I talked to a number of ditto head at work. Their warping of the facts were so bizarre that I decided to put together this "quiz"...and in it lies many of their answers. Try this out on a few people and see what you get....


1. The total cost of war and anti-terrorist operations since 911 have cost the US....

a. 87 Billion
b. 110 Billion
c. 205 Billion

2. Current funding shortfall for the Iraq war effort is estimated at:

a. 5 Billion
b. 10 Billion
c. At least 60 Billion

3. The Iraq War and Afghanistan costs a minimum of how much (on average) just to support the day to day military operaations?

a. 5 million/day or about 150 million/month
b. 20 million/day or about 600 million/month
c. 150 million/day or about 4.5 billion/month

4. The cost for "anti-terrorist operations" in FY05 will be most likely:

a. Less than what was spent in FY04
b. About the same as FY04
c. Considerably more

5. The first Iraq War (Desert Storm) cost a total of...

a. 100 Billion
b. 25 Billion
c. under 10 Billion

6. If W Bush doesn't ask congress for money until after the upcoming presidential election, what is the most likely source of money to keep the troops going for approximately 3 months until funding is approved?

a. Don't have to worry since discretionary funds could be used at any time.
b. W Bush doesn't already has approval from Congress for the war effort and therefore will get any needed funds in FY05 by just asking.
c. W Bush is between a rock and a hard place

7. Since most "experts" (and many Democrats) now recommend that a substantial number of extra troops are needed to ensure law and order in Iraq, how can these extra troops be paid for (or how can they go in the first place) if there is already a serious funding shortfall....and while no one is coming forth with the truth about the war costs?

a. These troops are already paid for because they are already on active duty
b. The cost for extra troops will be minimal and can be covered by discretionary spending
c. W Bush is between a rock and a hard place

8. W Bush acted on the advice of his father in a number of key areas in the overall plans for war in Iraq and lessons learned in terms of getting the financial support of an international coalition.

a. True
b. False

V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V

Answers:

1. 205B source: http://www.fcnl.org/smith/congress_defense_bud401-04.htm

2. 60B source: The McLaughlin Group, April 25, 2004. Also http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=2862. McLaughlin concluded that the real funding shortfall up through end FY04 would be not 4 billion but closer to 10B. Add to this the 50B that Bush admin has talked about for FY05, but conveniently acts as if it will be put off till after the election. The result is the 60B "shortfall". You can't even talk about this as walking a political tightrope. It's quite simply not presenting the facts of the war to the American people.

3. 150 million per day, multiple sources available in this range

4. It has to be more for FY04....despite the Bush admin claim that "no more than 50B" would be needed in '05. This is a common sense conclusion since hostilities are on the rise and the overall call is for more troops...not less...in FY05. Expect costs in '05 to easily exceed 100B.

5. under 10B, multiple sources in the 9 to 10B range.

6. source: McLaughlin Group, April 25, 2004. The group was dumbfounded and perplexed by this issue. Will Bush be forced to come forward and be honest? The whole thing makes no sense.

7. Answer is c. This is a follow-on to question 6. W is playing a precarious game with human lives. This is where the average person should really ponder what the hell is going on. W is between a rock and a hard place....he knows it....and it's got to be taxing his right wing psycho religious ideals to the brink.

8. W did not consult his father in any regard concerning the Iraq war, as he has admitted himself.

[whistle]

1. Geeze, I got a D....

...I had no idea that Iraq War I under Bush Senior cost that amount. Dubya is definately out of control.

[wadestock]

2. most people were way off on....

the comparative costs of Desert Storm vs. the new operation.
You can also go to http://costofwar.com/index.html and see a running total which looks high (and includes a good estimate for additional interest payments), but doesn't really reflect the TOTAL cost which is getting absurdly high.

Add all of the amounts together and we are right now in it for the 205B plus the 60B (at least) through the election and that comes to a staggering 265 Billion.

You can then see that a total of in excess of 300B will be spent realistically by next year.

If you also want to add in the interest payments like the above website did...I'd have to go over their calculations, but I think you're good for another 20Billion or so more assuming the 10 year note that they did at 4%.

[Bandit]

4. Gulf War 1 did cost much more than ten billion just not to Americans

Bush 1 did, to his great credit, get much world wide support in both money and troops. The costs of that war were shared among the world nations. Bush* has been very arrogant in his approach to things and no other country wants to aid the US. I don't blame them. They were not taken in by all the LIES the way stupid Americans were.

[wadestock]

5. I think the "non shared cost" was around 100B

and that was what one ditto head in here said the cost was.....although at the time I remember most ditto heads saying that we actually MADE money off Desert Storm!!

As we know, they are incredibly adept these days at fudging with financial figures aren't they....

[wadestock]

3. Update on money spent since Desert Storm....

Another interesting calculation from Col. Dan Smith, USA, Ret. from the cited website.....

$280.9 billion total spent......

a conservative total of funding spent since the end of the first Gulf War for operations to contain Iraq, to combat terrorism, and to fight in and then reconstruct Afghanistan and Iraq;